I'm only worried, what could happen if someone send them false Info and everybody believes its fo' real.Ekonk said:
The rape-charge: I like to think that the Spy-Guys aren't sooooooooo twentieth-century.
So I haven't decided whether he did or not.
Wikileaks
- Thread starter debramster123
- Start date
Recommended Videos
The rape-charge: I like to think that the Spy-Guys aren't sooooooooo twentieth-century.
So I haven't decided whether he did or not.
Magenera said:
Poptart Invasion said:
I would like to point out that while two wrongs don't make a right three lefts do.
Of course there are some files which should better not be seen by the publicity but I want to know what the government does and not just what the government tells me they do. I don't care what some diplomat thinks about another country but I want more transparency, I want to know where my tax money goes.
I think this video is really good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM1HlfVF4I4
I think this video is really good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM1HlfVF4I4
We have to remember that wikileaks is a community, not just one person. Anybody can upload a leak once it's verified, as far as I am aware.
As to whether the entire site is wrong, I'm not sure.
For the most part, their leaks are revealing and I support making info open, and I remember the founder himself saying that they censored names or info that would cause direct harm on individuals.
That said, their releasing of locations of secret compounds and bases is unnecessary and does nothing to make us more aware, all it does is list them, not saying this or this happened there, and THAT did put those locations at risk.
Furthermore, he has said that his intent is to harm the US, so that by itself is worrying.
I really wish he would release this kind of stuff about ALL countries, then everybody would be too busy cleaning up their own image to be angry at each other.
In short, their first recent leak that was heavily reported on by the media I more or less support, I am under the impression that they censored stuff that would cause direct harm.
I think releasing the list of secret facittlites was foolish and THAT was was wrong, and should not have been done.
As to whether the entire site is wrong, I'm not sure.
For the most part, their leaks are revealing and I support making info open, and I remember the founder himself saying that they censored names or info that would cause direct harm on individuals.
That said, their releasing of locations of secret compounds and bases is unnecessary and does nothing to make us more aware, all it does is list them, not saying this or this happened there, and THAT did put those locations at risk.
Furthermore, he has said that his intent is to harm the US, so that by itself is worrying.
I really wish he would release this kind of stuff about ALL countries, then everybody would be too busy cleaning up their own image to be angry at each other.
In short, their first recent leak that was heavily reported on by the media I more or less support, I am under the impression that they censored stuff that would cause direct harm.
I think releasing the list of secret facittlites was foolish and THAT was was wrong, and should not have been done.
Yes, if somebody can't smell this much bullshit from the dark side of Triton, they deserve to live under the foot of Big Brother. It may be a bit of hyperbole, but well, slippery slopes and all...Ekonk said:
But to be fair, the charge may be valid. However, that's hardly a reason to land on Interpol's most wanted list, as half of the tourists to Thailand would be on there as well...
It has repercussions on ordinary citizens because it makes it harder for diplomats to do their job, and citizens have an interest in effective and advantageous diplomacy. It's like cutting research funding: sure, it doesn't directly affect anybody but the scientists, but down the road everyone is going to miss out.D_987 said:
It has repercussions on soldiers specifically because access to this kind of mildly-classified information in the field (which is how Bradley Manning got hold of it) is going to be cut way down, even for people who could really have used it.
The man is doing good. Wikileaks is one of the best things that has ever happened. People deserve to know whats going on behind the doors. I hope he gets released quickly, though we all know it won't happen.
Complete freedom of information. Any kind. Wikileaks for me is the bastion of what journalism should be, if nothing else, we need more groups like that, people need to be informed of everything their governments do, only that way we can strive towards a better society.
If the US government would have FULL transparency, they wouldn't be doing stupid shit in the middle east, which in turn would not create terrorist attacks.
I am ashamed that many people here are willing to trade freedom of speech, freedom of information, to create a false sense of security. As the people of this earth, it is our obligation to challenge our leaders, to point out their mistakes and create a better world for future generations.
And before anyone starts whining about collateral damage, that damage is not on our heads, nor on the heads of the whistleblowers, it's on the heads of the governments who made these decisions in the first place.
If the US government would have FULL transparency, they wouldn't be doing stupid shit in the middle east, which in turn would not create terrorist attacks.
I am ashamed that many people here are willing to trade freedom of speech, freedom of information, to create a false sense of security. As the people of this earth, it is our obligation to challenge our leaders, to point out their mistakes and create a better world for future generations.
And before anyone starts whining about collateral damage, that damage is not on our heads, nor on the heads of the whistleblowers, it's on the heads of the governments who made these decisions in the first place.
Something I see a lot is people asking if you would want your mom knowing about your porn collection or if you would want people being able to look through your personal emails. I think an important point of distinction here is that this isn't someones private life. I don't want to know about Hilary's(probably vast) porn collection, or someone's sexual preferences or the gossip they have about their friends.
These were messages sent in an official capacity over official channels. We elect these people(or they are appointed by those we do elect) to do a job for us and they should be held accountable for what they say in the process of that job. If you work for a company that was trying to boost relations with another business, and you used your work email to bad mouth them you would find yourself severely reprimanded or out of a job. Thats not the fault of the IT guy who caught the email and reported it, and its certainly a good plan for them to monitor for such things because it does look so bad for the company. I would feel much more sympathy for the politicians if some of these embarrassing comments had been leaked from their personal emails, while that still would be inappropriate(talking trash about coworkers or competitors will even on your personal facebook would still be punishable at most companies) it at least has more of an expectation of privacy, and something sent in your name looks like your opinion, something sent on an official channel seems to be the countries opinion.
Any country that has any resources at all has the best espionage program they can afford to gather information on everyone else. I would almost guarantee that any first world country has at least 90% of all the information that was leaked about each other and a lot more that wasn't. All of this is kept really close to the vest though and while most people are aware that our governments are doing things out of our view, most don't really know what sorts things those are. I think the release of information that primarily just hurts egos and shows things that the leaders don't really want to own up to is a great thing. We need the government to remember that it is accountable to us and to have a way to monitor its screw-ups so that we can reprimand and correct them rather than allowing them to continue and come to light in a massively negative way rather than just an embarrassing one. As individuals we may not have the resources to have our own espionage program in order to play the game the way the world plays, but wikileaks gives us something close.
And for all you youngin's out there who need an example of our governments covert actions blowing up in our face beyond just embarrassment because they hadn't been kept accountable you may want to look up what Contra was beyond just being a game.
These were messages sent in an official capacity over official channels. We elect these people(or they are appointed by those we do elect) to do a job for us and they should be held accountable for what they say in the process of that job. If you work for a company that was trying to boost relations with another business, and you used your work email to bad mouth them you would find yourself severely reprimanded or out of a job. Thats not the fault of the IT guy who caught the email and reported it, and its certainly a good plan for them to monitor for such things because it does look so bad for the company. I would feel much more sympathy for the politicians if some of these embarrassing comments had been leaked from their personal emails, while that still would be inappropriate(talking trash about coworkers or competitors will even on your personal facebook would still be punishable at most companies) it at least has more of an expectation of privacy, and something sent in your name looks like your opinion, something sent on an official channel seems to be the countries opinion.
Any country that has any resources at all has the best espionage program they can afford to gather information on everyone else. I would almost guarantee that any first world country has at least 90% of all the information that was leaked about each other and a lot more that wasn't. All of this is kept really close to the vest though and while most people are aware that our governments are doing things out of our view, most don't really know what sorts things those are. I think the release of information that primarily just hurts egos and shows things that the leaders don't really want to own up to is a great thing. We need the government to remember that it is accountable to us and to have a way to monitor its screw-ups so that we can reprimand and correct them rather than allowing them to continue and come to light in a massively negative way rather than just an embarrassing one. As individuals we may not have the resources to have our own espionage program in order to play the game the way the world plays, but wikileaks gives us something close.
And for all you youngin's out there who need an example of our governments covert actions blowing up in our face beyond just embarrassment because they hadn't been kept accountable you may want to look up what Contra was beyond just being a game.
Wikileaks is necessary. You never know, they may discover something along the lines of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers as they..... do what they do.
Oh. Well, in that case, I redact my previous statement and issue this one in its place:Mrhappyface 2 said:
"I'm with Wikileaks. If your government is stupid enough to let a classified video of your helicopter shooting civilians fall into the hands of a
I'm not delusional enough to think that we can march into a country in a state such as many of the Middle Eastern countries and be successful while playing nicely.
If the general public is able to accept that then the information on Wikileaks could be made public. Until then, it should be hidden.
If the general public is able to accept that then the information on Wikileaks could be made public. Until then, it should be hidden.
Information is classified for a number of reasons:
1) To protect the source, be it a person or some piece of technology. Information gained from a source will, at the very least betray the capabilities of a system and allow one to better guard against collection. At the worst, this information can be used to identify a human source and thus place them in great peril. Indeed, some of the most classified documents you'll ever find are classified specifically to protect the source, be it technical or human.
2) To protect national security. It can be directly related to the first point but often it is more direct. Classified information might betray new strategies, deployments, acquisitions etc that can be directly leveraged to harm a nation.
People who believe you can release hundreds of thousands of classified documents and simply harm the latter are either incredibly stupid or incredibly naive. I don't think Wiki leaks is wrong to leak the information, but by the same token I also think they are entitled to no protection by the law that is not universally extended to spies.
1) To protect the source, be it a person or some piece of technology. Information gained from a source will, at the very least betray the capabilities of a system and allow one to better guard against collection. At the worst, this information can be used to identify a human source and thus place them in great peril. Indeed, some of the most classified documents you'll ever find are classified specifically to protect the source, be it technical or human.
2) To protect national security. It can be directly related to the first point but often it is more direct. Classified information might betray new strategies, deployments, acquisitions etc that can be directly leveraged to harm a nation.
People who believe you can release hundreds of thousands of classified documents and simply harm the latter are either incredibly stupid or incredibly naive. I don't think Wiki leaks is wrong to leak the information, but by the same token I also think they are entitled to no protection by the law that is not universally extended to spies.
For the record, as a former member of the very same profession as the person who (allegedly) did the leaking in the first place, I'm quite sure the man (if guilty) should be dealt with in the manner reserved for spies and traitors. If guilty he knew the risks. He knew what was at stake. He shall find no shelter in claims of ignorance. It matters not what his motivation was, he knew the risks and he (if guilty) deserves a peasant's death and an unmarked grave.
I think wikileaks is awesome, simply because its funny to see all those politicians getting in a huff about it, shouting "off with his head" at Julian Assange like theyre the Red Queen. Goverments need to be scrutinised. Though it is rather nice to see so many countries working together to shut down an organisation.
I think he's doing the right thing. Why would our governing body have the right to hide information from us? Why should they? My only complaint is that some information might endanger people... However
if this is true, then it's not the fault of Wikileaks. Do you have a source for it? It's still a problem, but the U.S. should solve it. As for things like revealing how US soldiers deal with foreign citizens in war zones, it's disgusting, and it should be revealed. Those soldiers should be court martialled, dishonorably discharged and jailed.Blaster395 said:
He has. However, the US citizens are probably the people who submit the most files, the US has their fingers in the most pies, the country is free enough that it's unlikely someone is monitoring their internet right now (yeah, I'm looking at you China) and they're one of the biggest first world countries. So there really should be a majority of files on the US, or the laws of probability have failed us.KeyMaster45 said:
Anyone else see the irony here? Despite the fact that Wikileaks has not been charged with any crimes, the democratic US gov is trying to cover up their authoritarian way of operating around the world (i.e., everything posted on Wikileaks) by operating in an authoritarian manner to:
- shut down Wikileaks.org (http://www.openmarket.org/2010/12/08/does-wikileaks-have-a-first-amendment-case-against-joe-lieberman/), and
- eliminate fund raising (http://techcrunch.com/2010/12/08/paypal-wikileaks/) (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/08/wikileaks-us-russia-visa-mastercard)
- shut down Wikileaks.org (http://www.openmarket.org/2010/12/08/does-wikileaks-have-a-first-amendment-case-against-joe-lieberman/), and
- eliminate fund raising (http://techcrunch.com/2010/12/08/paypal-wikileaks/) (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/08/wikileaks-us-russia-visa-mastercard)
When the organization in question is performing the job classicially reserved for spies and intelligence gathering organizations they become a combatant in a particular kind of warfare. The organization is in violation of laws in various nations and, depending upon the particular interpretation of circumstance, also in violation of a number of international laws.dcrane said:
The thing is, intelligence gathering generally takes place in what has long remained a gray area. It is expected, even to a degree condoned but any target of intelligence gathering operations will do whatever it takes to ensure their secrecy is maintained. Being a private organization, the obvious and direct solution (kinetic action) would be frowned upon by the international community at large and would be difficult to justify when similar action is not taken against the intelligence assets of various nation states. But when direct action is still possible and easy, it becomes the obvious solution, especially when you can simply rely on the legal system itself.
The bottom line is simple enough. The person who did the leaking violated us Federal law in addition to military law. Specifically they are guilty of treason and espionage - both of which are capital offenses. The person who disseminated the information on the other hand is operating in a legal gray area. They most certainly violated various laws but many of these laws only apply if his country of residence chooses to extradite. The stance of international law itself is quite murky and subject to a great deal of interpretation. Generally speaking espionage in a time of peace is illegal but in time of war it is legal but even then you have numerous caveats that make it difficult to define what a war might entail.
My opinion is simple enough. The one who did the leaking deserves to be punished as a traitor and a spy. The one who did the disseminating deserves to reap the endless legal whirlwind that will haunt him forever. Both parties went into this ordeal knowing the stakes and thus neither party deserves even a shred of leniency. It matters little what the information is or how useful it is to the enemies of any particular nation. If you want to play at espionage, you need to ensure you don't get caught in the act.